At first, I’d like to ask you a rather
imprudent question: Do you feel sorry that you didn’t become the world champion?

No. I even don’t know what to tell you in this regard. (I continued
to wait for his answer) Well, I don’t want to talk on this subject.
Obviously, you expected that I would answer something like “it’s a tragedy of my
whole life”, didn’t you? Now I understand that at that time there were some
chess players who played better than me.

Nevertheless, you were in the top five in the late 1960s. And each time,
there was something that prevented you from getting the chess crown.

It was not something, but somebody. To be objective, I fought against
outstanding chess players!

When did you understand that you wouldn’t get the title?

Frankly, I don’t remember the date. Anyway, I didn’t think about it when Fischer
defeated me. Maybe it happened in 1973, when I was taking part in an Interzonal
tournament in Leningrad. I felt nervous before the tournament. The beginning of
the competition turned out to be successful for me. However, then I lost my
energy and the hunger for battle - I wanted to fight, but I couldn’t.
However, after this you won many strong tournaments!

Yes, three years later I won the Biel Interzonal tournament. Nevertheless, this
time Portish immediately stopped me in the quarterfinals. I was 40 years old,
and I didn’t want to go through this again. I retained my ambitions, I wanted to
fight and to win but… Well, did you ask me about my inner feelings?!
What helped you to get so close to the top of chess pyramid?

Persistence and strong will. Perhaps, I worked a lot! When you achieve a success
in something you always want to get more in future. After all, you can’t do
without being self-confident…
Oh, yes. Bent Larsen and his self-confidence was a pet subject for facetious
remarks in the Soviet press!

Yes, I guess so. Nevertheless, I have never put on a show of bravado. I always
was a frank man.
Was it your ambition that pushed you when you asked for the first board at the
“Match of the Century” in 1970, or did you really think that you played stronger
than Fischer at the moment?

There is nothing to discuss! By that moment, I had won almost all tournaments,
while Fischer kept staying at home and didn’t want to fight… Why did I have to
yield to him in this respect? Generally, I was very much surprised when Euwe
made this proposal. With all due respect to Fischer’s style of playing, I think
that it was tactless to make such a proposal to me. Ambitions? No. It was a
matter of principle!
Did this episode somehow affect your relations with Fischer?

I was on good terms with him. We respected each other and nothing more… We had
no choice – we did one business, and took part in the same tournaments.
Did Fischer’s fine gesture have an effect on you one year later when he defeated
you in that match?

Yes, it was an insufferable match… The organizers chose the wrong time for this
match. I was languid with the heat and Fischer was better prepared for such
exceptional circumstances... I saw chess pieces through a mist and, thus, my
level of playing was not good. It was a nightmare that I will never forget!
Fortune didn’t give me a single chance to win over him…
How did you take your loss?
At first, I wasn’t very much disappointed -- things happen! However, it’s very
difficult to forget this and to start everything from the very beginning.
I think that I haven’t managed to do this.
Well, in this case let’s talk about your boyhood. Why did you choose chess?

I doubt whether we can knowingly choose something when in our boyhood. I was a
sick boy, and in order to entertain myself I started to play chess. I learnt how
to play chess at the age of 6, and when I was 12 I became a member of a local
chess club…To my great surprise, I easily won over other children, and I liked
it!
How did you manage to develop your skills of playing provided that you had never
had a coach and the level of playing in Denmark was not so high?

I became a grandmaster when I was 21. Today, it’s a pension age for a
grandmaster (he laughs). It happened at the Moscow Olympiad of 1956. Two
years earlier, I had become the champion of Denmark. So, nobody could stand up
to me. The point is that in 1956 I won a match over Olafsson and got the title
of the strongest Scandinavian chess player!
How did you achieve such a great success?

I am a self-made man. I didn’t have an instructor, and I wasn’t engrossed in
chess manuals except the books of Nimzovitch, I just worked a lot playing chess.
Was it your talent or your capacity for work that helped you to make a success?

Generally, I don’t know. Probably, it was a combination of the former and the
latter.
It seems to me that the year of 1956 was a turning point in your chess career.
At that time, you had to fight against very strong chess players. Nevertheless,
you got the first place at the first board. How did you manage to do this?

I felt my power and understood that I had a grandmaster’s level of playing.
However, many people didn’t know about this, and, thus, I managed to get so many
“spare” points. I won over Gligoric and drew against Botvinnik – it was a pretty
good result for “an unknown master”! When I returned home, they greeted me like
a victor…
How did you become a candidate for the championship title?

Everything comes with experience. At some moment, you understand your advantages
and disadvantages in chess and make a qualitative leap. Provided that I didn’t
play in the strongest tournaments, I could experiment with my style. In two
different tournaments I could play in two different ways. I became more
experienced and I wasn’t afraid of making a mistake. On the contrary, I have
spent a lot of time correcting my mistakes. Besides, I trained myself to become
a real fighter…

You said that Nimzovitch, a positional chess player, was your teacher and, at
the same time, you usually played very sharp chess. Did you look for the golden
mean?

Yes, I did. Sometimes, in the beginning of a game I had to choose either to play
the King’s Gambit or the Catalan System! It’s the Nimzovitch style - your play
can be too complicated or too easy, but the main thing is that your opponent
won’t discover your intentions!

Tell me, who of modern chess players has a style of playing that is similar to
yours?

It’s a difficult question. Certainly, I don’t keep up with modern chess, but I
don’t see a congenial candidate.
Probably, any chess player of your generation had this style.

Maybe it was Petrosian. We had the same basis: “My System,” by Nimzovitch. We
are so called foster-brothers. However, we had different feelings of a position
-- and of danger. On the one hand, Petrosian hasn’t lost so many games as I, but,
on the other hand, he hasn’t won so many of them.
Have you ever wanted to play like some other chess player?

Certainly, I have. When I was young, Tal was my idol! Fortunately, I have never
tried to play in his style – I just liked to watch him playing. Tal was a
fearless fighter. Nobody could successfully accomplish so many incorrect
maneuvers! He simply smashed his opponents…
Did you really want to play “correct” chess, to make only correct evaluations?

Not so fast, mister! The point is that chess doesn’t have a strict criterion of
correctness – chess is a multiform game!
When did you feel yourself strong enough to enter the elite group?

I think that it happened when in 1964 I shared the first place in Amsterdam with
Tal, Spassky, and Smyslov! Moreover, at that time I thought that I would have
taken the first place if I had played more accurately. Perhaps, this tournament
was my heyday of mastery: that time I played with great pleasure.

By the way, whom do you call the greatest chess player in the history of chess?

The question is too abstract. However, I have the answer. Undoubtedly,
it is Philidor. At the end of the 17th century he formulated the principles that
we use even now.

And whom would you name from your former opponents? Is it, probably, Fischer?

I don’t know… Probably, it’s Korchnoi – his chess longevity is amazing!
We all are on pensions, while he continues fighting. And he is successful.

Bent, can you tell us about your life today? I haven’t heard anything about you
for the last few years.

Now I play chess very rarely. Generally, I spend a lot of time at home.

Do you still live in Denmark?

No, I live in Argentina. My wife is Argentinean, and we have lived there
from the beginning of the 1970s. I like the way I live: I lead a quiet and
measured life. This journey to Moscow is like a convulsion of nature for me -- I
had to change everything in my life. However, I am very pleased that the world
of chess didn’t forget about me.

Do you regret that you have devoted yourself to chess?

I don’t think that it’s useful to complain about your destiny, since you
can’t return to the past. I don’t regret anything. Chess gave me many happy
moments. Sure, professional chess is a severe and exhausting struggle.
Nevertheless, I am not sorry.

Did you have any hobby that competed with chess?

Yes. At some moment, I was ready to go in for politics! I found it interesting
to politicize. However, later on I decided to continue playing chess…

Why? You were so popular in our country. You could even have become a president,
couldn’t you?

This point of view is a bit naive. Finally, I decided that a chess player has to
play chess and a politician – to fight against his political opponents.

I know that you have written a perfect book, “50 Selected Games”. Do you have
any other books?Yes, I have. I have written a lot of books during my life. Now I am
planning to write the continuation, “100 Selected Games”.

Bent, what do you think about modern chess? Does it impress you?

On one hand, many interesting chess players have appeared in chess
lately. Formerly, chess players didn’t have such serious ambitions. Then
Kasparov came into the world of chess, followed by a group of young grandmasters,
and they showed us their hunger to fight and to win! Just look at Shirov,
Ivanchuk, and Anand: they are amazing! On the other hand, these
Kasparov-computer matches exasperate me. And as for advanced chess, it’s simply
inadmissible! It’s a road to nowhere. Chess loses its mysticism. Nobody will
consider chess as an art. It’s a pity that it’s the very champion who destroys
chess.

Who do you think, will become Kasparov’s successor at the chess throne?

Do you consider Kasparov as the world champion?

It’s quite obvious -- he is the strongest chess player in the world and nobody
could defeat him in a match so far!

It doesn’t mean that he is the world champion!

Who is the champion then? Probably, Karpov?

Karpov is the FIDE champion. I think that there is no world champion
today. Moreover, it seems to me that the world champion cannot be defined in the
knockout tournament. Frankly, it’s a very complicated question.

What are the FIDE disadvantages?

Obviously, FIDE has its weak points. However, it’s the sole chess organization
that is still held in respect in the world of chess. I think that Kasparov has
to sign a peace treaty with it. I don’t like that every year he creates a new
chess structure.
Who do you think is the strongest chess player now?

Yes, you are right. Today Kasparov is the strongest player. A few years ago,
Vishy Anand had this title. However, nobody has the title of the world champion
now.
Is there any sense in this title in general?

I think that it doesn’t have much sense. In chess we can use the tennis system
when there is no champion. The first position in the rating list is quite enough!
By the way, what title does Fischer have nowadays, considering that in 1992 he
played a return match against Spassky and was crowned with laurels?

Oh, yes. It was a “great” return match (he breaks into a smile). Perhaps, I
should also play a return match against somebody?

What awaits chess in future?

I think that chess has a bright future. I like how they play chess now.
Kasparov showed us very strong play this spring at Wijk aan Zee and Linares!

Well, who do you think would win if the strongest chess players of your
generation at their heyday met today’s elite chess players?

It is a very difficult question. I think that we would win! However, I like
Kasparov ’89 more than Fischer’72.